Alaska, Boeing roles key at NTSB hearing on jet-crash findings

Tomorrow, nearly three years after Alaska Airlines Flight 261 plunged into the Pacific Ocean, the National Transportation Safety Board will convene in Washington, D.C., to consider its long-awaited findings on what caused the crash.

The board's findings on Alaska's maintenance operations and the design of the plane will shed light on Alaska's and Boeing's role in the crash, and will be closely watched by attorneys who have brought wrongful-death suits on behalf of families who lost relatives. All 88 passengers and crew, many from the Seattle area, died Jan. 31, 2000, when the plane crashed off Southern California en route from Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, to San Francisco and Seattle.

Here are some frequently asked questions and answers on what will happen at the hearing and what could follow it:

Q: After such a long investigation involving many participants, who gets to decide what caused the crash?

A: Four safety-board members, all presidential appointees, will vote on the findings of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) staff. The board usually accepts staff findings but sometimes asks for more information.

Q: Is there enough evidence to determine the probable cause?

A: Yes. From almost the outset of the crash, investigators and the parties have agreed the two pilots lost control of the plane, an MD-83 built by McDonnell Douglas, because the jackscrew assembly failed. The 2-foot-long jackscrew, located in the plane's tail, controls the horizontal stabilizer, a winglike component that maintains the MD-83's angle of flight.

Q: Why did the mechanism fail?

A: The NTSB staff, after months of testing and debate, concluded in a confidential draft report that the jackscrew and a nut through which it passes lacked adequate lubrication. As a result, the threads on the nut were sheared off.

Q: Did a mechanic at Alaska forget to grease the part or skip the task?

A: Investigators were unable to answer that question. Work cards show mechanics lubricated the mechanism. Evidence was also found that a grease fitting may have been clogged.

Q: Will the conclusions stop there?

A: No. The NTSB staff also examined broader factors that likely contributed to the crash, such as how frequently Alaska greased the jackscrew assembly and checked it for wear.

Q: What did they find?

A: That Alaska extended the time between lubrications and wear checks, without sufficient analysis.

Q: Didn't the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approve those changes?

A: Yes, but with minimal review, according to the staff's draft report.

Q: What about the design of the plane? Aren't redundant systems supposed to be built into planes, so that failure of one component can't cause a crash?

A: Boeing, which in 1997 acquired McDonnell Douglas, maker of the MD-83, has argued the jackscrew assembly has a dual-thread system that provides a safety backup. If one set of threads failed, the other was supposed to pick up the load. But the crash showed the system was not fail-safe.

Boeing also has said the jackscrew system is safe when properly maintained, noting that the crash of Flight 261 was the first attributed to a jackscrew failure since the component was introduced more than 35 years ago as part of the McDonnell Douglas DC-9, predecessor to the MD-80 series.

Q: What did the NTSB staff say about the jackscrew design?

A: That the mechanism's design is flawed and that modifications should be made to about 1,190 MD-80 series planes still in service, as well as about 115 MD-90s. Though Boeing no longer builds those planes, it still produces a smaller cousin, the Boeing 717, that operates with a jackscrew assembly that could be subject to modifications. About 105 of those planes are in service.

Q: Are the staff's draft findings automatically presented to the board members?

A: No. Right up to the time of tomorrow's hearing, board members can ask the staff to make revisions.

Q: What changes might occur?

A: The staff's finding of a design flaw has the potential to be dropped before the hearing.

That subject generated considerable debate within the agency. At least one influential board member, John Goglia, has privately expressed reservations about blaming the design, according to people close to the investigation.

Q: If the board does call for design modifications, and the FAA orders changes to planes, how much would that cost Boeing?

A: No figures have been disclosed, but any change of that magnitude would be costly. Boeing has privately told the board it has found ways to make the jackscrew assembly safer, though no details have been released.

Q: Is the FAA likely to accept a design change if the NTSB suggests that?

A: Yes, though it can take time. The NTSB called in March 1999 for Boeing 737 rudder-system changes after two crashes. It took until September 2000 for the FAA to adopt the recommendation.

There is one wildcard: The FAA is headed by Marion Blakey, who moved in September from the NTSB, where she had been chairwoman and earned praise for quickly reacting to safety issues. President Bush named her to both posts.

Q: Will Flight 261 lead to changes at the FAA itself?

A: Lax oversight of Alaska's maintenance operations by FAA officials will undoubtedly receive attention in the NTSB report — especially since it echoes some similar themes from the 1996 ValuJet crash in Florida that killed 110 people.

The ValuJet crash involved failures to follow basic safety procedures by transporting highly flammable oxygen generators. After that crash, the FAA promised to be more vigilant in making sure airlines followed maintenance and safety procedures.

But the crash of Flight 261 renewed questions about the agency's performance and what some critics have labeled its cozy relationship with Alaska.

Q: Will the NTSB call for changes that would affect the airline industry in general?

A: The draft report recommends the FAA take a stronger role in overseeing airlines when they alter maintenance plans, rather than leaving much of the decision-making up to the industry.

Q: What's Alaska's position on the crash?

A: Alaska has contended a Boeing-approved grease corroded the jackscrew assembly and that McDonnell Douglas blessed maintenance procedures for the plane. The NTSB has rejected the grease-corrosion theory.

Q: If Alaska accepts no blame, has it been doing anything differently since the crash?

A: Yes. Alaska insisted immediately after the crash that it had one of the best maintenance programs in the industry. But it was forced to back down in June 2000, when the FAA announced it had found major deficiencies in the maintenance programs and threatened to shut down Alaska's repair facilities.

Under pressure and with the FAA's help, Alaska made sweeping changes, rewriting its maintenance manuals and hiring hundreds of new mechanics and many new managers. More recently, it started greasing components in its MD-80 fleet with greater frequency.

Q: So is Alaska an improved airline?

A: Yes, according to officials who have been critical of Alaska. The chances of a crash similar to Flight 261 have been sharply reduced, they say.

But some caution that a culture doesn't change overnight and they remain concerned about reports from workers within the airline about relatively small lapses.

Just in the past month, a current Alaska supervisor and a former supervisor sued the airline, alleging they were the victims of retaliation for raising safety concerns.

Alaska hasn't commented on the suit but continues to say safety is its top priority.

Q: Wasn't there a criminal investigation of the Flight 261 crash?

A: Yes, but the U.S. Attorney's Office in San Francisco announced a year ago that it had not found evidence of criminal conduct in the crash.

Still, prosecutors said they would await the NTSB's findings before closing the case.

So far, officials say, they doubt there will be anything in the NTSB's report to justify criminal charges.

Q: Will we know everything the NTSB has found after tomorrow's hearing?

A: No. If the board accepts the staff's findings and recommendations, a written report won't be released for about a month. It will contain details and a narrative history of the crash.

Steve Miletich: 206-464-3302 or smiletich@seattletimes.com.